Okay, I'll kick this one off.

Do "black" and "African American" mean the same thing to everyone else? Because I don't treat them as synonyms.

"People see dark faces out there, and the perception is that they're African American," Los Angeles Angels center fielder Torii Hunter says. "They're not us. They're impostors.

"Even people I know come up and say, 'Hey, what color is Vladimir Guerrero? Is he a black player?' I say, 'Come on, he's Dominican. He's not black.'"

Hunter's words were stupid. However, I think he deserves slack. He surely did not mean to be offensive. The problem, though, is that whites who say things like this are NEVER given any slack. It's a double-standard. If we are going to pillory whites who make mistakes like this, then it's only fair to pillory blacks. My preference would be to always give people the benefit of the doubt.

Yet if Chris Kaman had said this, he would likely be suspended:

"People see white faces out there, and the perception is that they're white," Los Angeles Clippers center fielder Chris Kaman says. "They're not us. They're impostors.

"Even people I know come up and say, 'Hey, what color is Omri Casspi? Is he a white player?' I say, 'Come on, he's Israeli. He's not white.'"

Do "black" and "African American" mean the same thing to everyone else? Because I don't treat them as synonyms.

I do, even though I know I shouldn't. It's lazy shorthand.

It's a double-standard.

Yes, it's a double-standard. But it's a double-standard by virtue of the fact that a statement made by a member of a dominant group is different from the same statement made by a member of a minority group.

I do, even though I know I shouldn't. It's lazy shorthand.

What time is the Tonic thing?

"People see dark faces out there, and the perception is that they're African American," Los Angeles Angels center fielder Torii Hunter says. "They're not us. They're impostors.

"Even people I know come up and say, 'Hey, what color is Vladimir Guerrero? Is he a black player?' I say, 'Come on, he's Dominican. He's not black.'"

God people are sensitive these days., We all know what he was trying to say, that the lack of black players in baseball is obscured to some by dark skinned latin players. There is nothing offensive about it. I really wish the PC police would get their funding cut.

I do, even though I know I shouldn't.

Who says you shouldn't? They're just arbitrary tags for social constructs.

people wonder why athletes don’t talk to the media that much

No, actually I wonder why yall talk to them so damn much.

Craig is right. That statement (and the underlying sentiment to some degree) was clearly repugnant. I hate to pull out the old "If a white guy..." card, but if a white player gave an interview that length and used the N word in it once, we would slaughter him for it (and rightfully so). The defense that "[t]hat wasn’t even the main topic of the discussion. That was like a piece of the conversation, .5% of 100%." wouldn't have cut it.

I'm not sure the thought Hunter was expressing was anywhere near as ugly as the words he chose, but that doesn't really make it that much better. I'm sure this incident will get blown out of proportion, but Hunter is just making it worse by denying it and throwing out accusations. He used the word "imposter" and that's unnacceptable.

One NBCsports.com writer, Craig Calcaterra, called Hunter's statement "100% unadulterated bullcrap." But Hunter, who directs much of his charitable efforts to the development of inner-city baseball, claimed his comments "were distorted and taken out of context."

WTF? Fluff piece? How is that relevant to what Craig said?

Also, Repoz - was the article edited since you posted/quoted it? That portion I quoted above isn't the same as the one you posted above and I can find no mention of the word "repugnant" in the OP anymore.

In Craig's original post, he said this (as well as the above "bullcrap" quote):

But this notion that today's diversity in baseball is some sort of sham and that black Dominican players are "impostors" is beyond repugnant. No, they're not from the U.S., but if Jose Reyes and Vladimir Guerrero aren't black, I'm not sure anyone is.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/torii-hunter-black-dominican-players-are-imposters.html.php

Torii was trying to say a bit more than that the lack of black players is obscured to some by dark skinned latin players:

"As African-American players, we have a theory that baseball can go get an imitator and pass them off as us," Hunter says. "It's like they had to get some kind of dark faces, so they go to the Dominican or Venezuela because you can get them cheaper. It's like, 'Why should I get this kid from the South Side of Chicago and have Scott Boras represent him and pay him $5 million when you can get a Dominican guy for a bag of chips?"

The "impostors" line wasn't a single-word slip. It's part of a "theory" the African-American players have, according to Torii.

Would Torii consider Fergie Jenkins an "imposter"?

Can you imagine Kaman saying this and not catching hell:

"As white-American players, we have a theory that basketball can go get an imitator and pass them off as us," Kaman says. "It's like they had to get some kind of pale faces, so they go to Serbia or Argentina because you can get them cheaper. It's like, 'Why should I get this kid from the suburban Chicago and have Arn Tellem represent him and pay him $5 million when you can get an Argentine guy for a bag of chips?'"

By the way, Torii's notion seems to be that there is a fixed quota in baseball for non-white players and that Latin American players are being given those jobs in place of black-American players because they are cheaper.

Beside the fact that the best young, black Latin players (a la Chapman, Villalona, etc.) are MORE expensive than their American counterparts*, Hunter's notion is completely groundless and stupid. The reason teams acquire Latin talent is just because they are good players. Period. If more black-Americans played baseball (as was the case in the past), more talented black-American players would today have jobs in the majors, regardless of who their agents were.

*All U.S. born amateur players (and others subject to the draft) get screwed vis-a-vis the Latin players in terms of negotiating power. Hunter seems to not care about that fact in making his idiotic commentary.

"Even people I know come up and say, 'Hey, what color is Vladimir Guerrero? Is he a black player?' I say, 'Come on, he's Dominican. He's not black.'"

This is strange to me on two levels.

First, people come up to him and say that?

Second, is he not black? This is what I was getting at with #1, it seems like Torii's using "black" and "African-American" as synonyms. I'm not saying he certainly should be referred to as being black, I'm just curious what the rest of you think.

No, actually I wonder why yall talk to them so damn much.

Because that's part of what they're paid for? The media gives all sorts of free publicity to MLB and their component teams, and part of the cost of that is that the players have to deal with reporters. Torii Hunter should fear the day that nobody wants to ask him any questions - that means he's no longer relevant.

Personally, I think that interviews with current athletes are some of the most boring and pointless things to come out of the news media, but there's a demand for it.

Do "black" and "African American" mean the same thing to everyone else? Because I don't treat them as synonyms.

Context, context, context. To a racist club owner in 1946, it's all the same thing. In a discussion of cultures, it's not. There are a zillion vantage points from which you can look at this, and anyone who thinks there's a one size fits all answer is delusional. Obviously Hunter was speaking in a cultural context.

I don't even understand how people could be offended by this comment. Do people really think Hunter was ascribing some nefarious subterfuge on Dominican players? That they are trying to impersonate American blacks? To assume the precise dictionary definition of "impostor" and all of its negative implications in this case is being deliberately obtuse.

EDIT: Just read the expanded Hunter comments, about the alleged quota. Those are dumb.

To assume the precise dictionary definition of "impostor" and all of its negative implications in this case is being deliberately obtuse.

Impostor DOES have negative implications. Who uses "impostor" in a neutral way? I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems clear to me Hunter does have some bitterness about Latin ballplayers "taking" jobs. It's misguided, of course, but it doesn't make Hunter a bad guy. Maybe he just needs an education on the subject.

What time is the Tonic thing?

Starting around 6:30, but it is tomorrow

"Yes, it's a double-standard. But it's a double-standard by virtue of the fact that a statement made by a member of a dominant group is different from the same statement made by a member of a minority group."

So Peaches, would you condemn this statement if it had been made (as I posited above) by someone like Chris Kaman (a minority player on the Clippers)?

Again, I don't think Hunter deserves to be pilloried, certainly not for using un-PC language. I disagree with (what I sense to be) his premise--that Latin players are favored for cost reasons. I think that does not hold up to scrutiny. And likewise, I think if "a member of the dominant group" uses non-PC language, he should not be pilloried, either, unless it was clear to me he had bad intentions. But your comment suggests you would pillory whitey for being un-PC, even if he did not mean to be as offensive as Hunter was (by calling black Latins "impostors").

Torii was trying to say a bit more than that the lack of black players is obscured to some by dark skinned latin players:

"As African-American players, we have a theory that baseball can go get an imitator and pass them off as us," Hunter says. "It's like they had to get some kind of dark faces, so they go to the Dominican or Venezuela because you can get them cheaper. It's like, 'Why should I get this kid from the South Side of Chicago and have Scott Boras represent him and pay him $5 million when you can get a Dominican guy for a bag of chips?"

The "impostors" line wasn't a single-word slip. It's part of a "theory" the African-American players have, according to Torii.

Yep. That's the crucial part, right there.

I think this is a case of Torii being sorry he got caught/noticed.

Calcaterra has always been into this topic, so I am not surprised he is a key MSM guy slamming Hunter. Calcaterra has slammed people here as well on this topic.

"As African-American players, we have a theory that baseball can go get an imitator and pass them off as us," Hunter says. "It's like they had to get some kind of dark faces, so they go to the Dominican or Venezuela because you can get them cheaper. It's like, 'Why should I get this kid from the South Side of Chicago and have Scott Boras represent him and pay him $5 million when you can get a Dominican guy for a bag of chips?"

This is obviously phrased very poorly, and the "quota" idea is pretty stupid.

However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent (and not having to compete for said talent with the NBA, NFL, etc.). I imagine Hunter and others think MLB should invest more in US programs, i.e. the inner-city RBI program.

It's an interesting idea: high school baseball is certainly overshadowed by football and basketball, and college baseball isn't very athlete friendly (fewer scholarships, etc.). A lot of this could be attributed to the nature of the sport, which involves more high school talent, minor league seasoning, etc., but organized baseball does seem to do less for American-born players of all races than the other big team sports.

I can give him a pass, as our society continues to define race/creed/nationality with more granularity. But if he actually said "bag of chips", that is pretty far out there. Are they gonna steal his wallet, too?

Impostor DOES have negative implications. Who uses "impostor" in a neutral way?

But as part of that single quote, it is very difficult to see those negative implications. It would be a poor word choice, granted, but it could easily come off the tip of the tongue as a simple way to say Latin American black players are NOT the same as American black players.

Hunter's "theory that baseball can go get an imitator and pass them off as us" is the bad quote here.

Hunter's words were stupid. However, I think he deserves slack. He surely did not mean to be offensive. The problem, though, is that whites who say things like this are NEVER given any slack.

Take this with the usual biases, obviously, but I'd love to see a video of this interview. If Hunter is right that this was a small portion of the interview, having seen Hunter interviewed countless times, this reads to me like something he said while laughing and joking. I could be wrong, but he's often not particularly serious when talking about off-field stuff, and considering they're in Spring training, I'd imagine there were probably some dark skinned Latin Americans (the Angels have plenty - Abreu, Santana, Aybar, etc) in earshot. The "it's sad" part at the end appears to be pretty sincere.

Again, complete mea culpa if I'm wrong here, but we're not talking about a guy who usually conducts himself with the seriousness of Jesse Jackson in interviews. If I were Craig, I probably would have wanted to know a little more than just the text of the interview before I wrote what he wrote. My $.02.

On another note, and I'm sure this has been covered, but the gist of Hunter's comments are completely relevant to the alleged "problem" (and I'm not sure I believe one exists) of the lack of American blacks in baseball. If the issue is black kids in America rising to the major leagues (and if the subject of the interview was scholarships and such, then I'd assume it was), then it's completely germane to point out that that those who say "but look at guys like Vlad Guerrero! There are plenty of blacks in baseball!" aren't addressing the same issue, or even trying to.

However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent (and not having to compete for said talent with the NBA, NFL, etc.). I imagine Hunter and others think MLB should invest more in US programs, i.e. the inner-city RBI program.

The reason for this has nothing to do with cost or competing with the NBA or NFL. It has everything to do with US born players being subject to the draft. There is no incentive for an individual team to set up a baseball academy in the US.

However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent (and not having to compete for said talent with the NBA, NFL, etc.). I imagine Hunter and others think MLB should invest more in US programs, i.e. the inner-city RBI program.

I don't think anyone doubts baseball has a problem with reaching inner cities and african-american youths recently. We can see that foremost in the declining percentage of african-american MLB players. Torii is right on with this part of his criticism and should be applauded for his work on that front.

Latin American kids are typically more expensive, not cheaper. Someone mentioned this above. Latin kids are not subject to the draft or bonus slotting. Compare the bonuses of top draft picks to what the Latin American kids get.

However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent (and not having to compete for said talent with the NBA, NFL, etc.). I imagine Hunter and others think MLB should invest more in US programs, i.e. the inner-city RBI program.

Ummm, no.

They've invested a lot in Latin America b/c whatever talent they find/develop they get to sign. In the US they can't sign anyone before ~18 y.o., and are restricted in who they can sign by the draft.

Not competing with other sporst has nothing to do with it, and the talent is not cheap. Look at the bonuses given out to guys like Inoa and Sano, and they're very very far away from reaching the bigs, hence a huge risk.

"Even people I know come up and say, 'Hey, what color is Vladimir Guerrero? Is he a black player?' I say, 'Come on, he's Dominican. He's not black.'"

I wish I could find the article, but it's been years. Essentially, in the article, many, many Latin American players essentially agree with Hunter on this. Hunter's words are impolitic, but IMO there's nothing racist about his comment.

As another example, just look at the NBA, where the term "Euro" is used to distinguish between white players. Kirk Hinrich is white, Beno Udrih is a Euro. In this case, Hunter is black, Guerrero is Dominican. Nothing to rage at here.

But if he actually said "bag of chips", that is pretty far out there. Are they gonna steal his wallet, too?

I think "bag of chips" is meant to symbolize a far lesser amount of cash, as compared to $5 million.

"All that and a bag of chips"... I don't know.

I don't think anyone doubts baseball has a problem with reaching inner cities and african-american youths recently. We can see that foremost in the declining percentage of african-american MLB players. Torii is right on with this part of his criticism and should be applauded for his work on that front.

I'm all for opening up more opportunities, but how can you say that the proportion of african americans declining is a "problem"? As the percentage of foreign born players soared the percentage of african american and white american players had to fall.

How do we know what the percentage should be? Right now, the percentage of blacks among American born players is about the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population. Why do you think it should be higher?

As another example, just look at the NBA, where the term "Euro" is used to distinguish between white players. Kirk Hinrich is white, Beno Udrih is a Euro. In this case, Hunter is black, Guerrero is Dominican. Nothing to rage at here.

As Rich Rifkin pointed out multiple times above with his Kaman example - if a US born, white NBA player called Euro players "imposters" who the league was trying to "pass off" as US born white players, implying they have a quota of white players... well, that would be very offensive.

I meant that Hunter probably sees the MLB investments in Latin America as a missed opportunity to invest in American-born players. I'm not saying it's a correct statement.

Yeah it's a shame this is a law of nature and not something that MLB could change to incentive teams developing domestic talent.

An international draft is very much a possibility in the near future.

They've invested a lot in Latin America b/c whatever talent they find/develop they get to sign. In the US they can't sign anyone before ~18 y.o., and are restricted in who they can sign by the draft.

Yeah it's a shame this is a law of nature and not something that MLB could change to incentive teams developing domestic talent.

You mean abolish the draft? Don't hold your breath waiting for this one.

Also, Repoz - was the article edited since you posted/quoted it? That portion I quoted above isn't the same as the one you posted above and I can find no mention of the word "repugnant" in the OP anymore.

Craig just doesn't report the news...he am the news!

"However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent ..."

Spycake, on what basis do you think this talent is "cheap"? That is clearly what Torii Hunter believes. However, it's baseless, as far as I know. Latin players are not paid less than their market value later in their careers. They are paid more, ceteris paribus, than American amateur free agents, due to the draft. The academies they often play in are very expensive to run. In no way is it clear to me why anyone would think Latin talent is "cheap" talent.

You might wonder, then, whey MLB has turned its eyes to the Caribbean basin, if the baseball talent is not cheap? I think the answer is clear: because it is baseball talent.

What's lost in all this is that Torii Hunter is horribly overpaid and probably could be replaced by a cheaper Latin American player.

I'm all for opening up more opportunities, but how can you say that the proportion of african americans declining is a "problem"? As the percentage of foreign born players soared the percentage of african american and white american players had to fall.

How do we know what the percentage should be? Right now, the percentage of blacks among American born players is about the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population. Why do you think it should be higher?

Its not in a vacuum. The percentage of black youths playing baseball has dropped precipitously over the last few decades. Black kids are choosing other sports.

The percentage of blacks among American born players is nowhere near the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population in the other major pro sports.

I think what Torii meant to say was this

It's a double-standard. If we are going to pillory whites who make mistakes like this, then it's only fair to pillory blacks.

Not really. If neither group deserves to be pilloried, then the solution is to stop doing so.

In general, though, I'm not a fan of the "can you imagine if X had done Y?!?!" arguments. If Chris Kaman had made the comments you wrote, I think people would be puzzled, because those comments are nonsensical. He might be ridiculed as an idiot, but I don't think the statement would be called "beyond repugnant".

I don't even understand how people could be offended by this comment.

I'm not "offended" by it, but I think it's a pretty ridiculous statement for the reason that Rich mentioned in #12. I also think the owners have more of a reason to be offended by the statements than the Dominican players, to whom I agree he wasn't attributing any malice/dihonesty.

The percentage of blacks among American born players is nowhere near the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population in the other major pro sports.

OK, but how do we know that whites aren't underrepresented in the NFL and NBA vs. blacks being underrepresented in MLB?

I think it's a pretty good hypothesis that there is something institutional keeping white Americans from developing into great basketball players. Otherwise, why are there all these white guys who can play ball in Europe, and so few from the US?

I know the draft holds down prices for US baseball talent, but it's clear that it's cheaper to recruit and develop young talent in Latin America than it would be in the US, even without the draft. High school and college baseball is a fairly weak baseball minor league for the US, as compared to basketball and football. MLB would have to invest a lot more to develop young US talent than it currently spends to develop young Latin talent, even if there was no draft.

Everyone knows that Vlad Guerrero's slave ancenstors had it so much easier than Torii Hunter's slave ancestors.

I know the draft holds down prices for US baseball talent, but it's clear that it's cheaper to recruit and develop young talent in Latin America than it would be in the US, even without the draft. High school and college baseball is a fairly weak baseball minor league for the US, as compared to basketball and football. MLB would have to invest a lot more to develop young US talent than it currently spends to develop young Latin talent, even if there was no draft.

It's not more expensive in the US (and Puerto Rico) it's impossible. All players must go through the draft.

No team can spend a dime to develop players pre-draft, and get any benefit from that expenditure.

snapper, I think he's talking about a mlb-wide funding of baseball youth programs rather than developing individual players who become that team's property immediately.

snapper, I think he's talking about a mlb-wide funding of baseball youth programs rather than developing individual players who become that team's property immediately.

OK. But that's unlikely to be nearly as efficient in generating good ballplayers, even if you spend the same. Without the competition/self-interest of the individual teams, and the players directly competitng for contracts, I don't see it being more than a feel-good PR stunt.

Nasty Nate, you are correct -- I generally meant MLB-wide funding.

In the absence of a draft, you could add team-based funding like the Latin academies too.

Let's talk some numbers here.

I thought I remember someone postulating that ML teams were loading up on "cheap" Caribbean guys. IIRC, it was more about "organizational filler" type guys, though.

Top talent always gets paid. Top talent from the Caribbean often paid more than guys through the draft.

So, what are the costs to acquire a guy who's likely ceiling is AAA? Is there a real disparity in what a late round draft pick gets to sign vs a free agent deal?

snapper, that's a fair observation. I'm just speculating that Hunter disagrees, hence his comments.

The percentage of blacks among American born players is nowhere near the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population in the other major pro sports.

Way overrepresented compared to hockey.

Seriously, though, I think the comments have a very different connotation if the "impostor" comment is taken to mean that FOs are using them as impostors rather than that the latin-american players are willfully acting as impostors. I don't think that comment is true either, but at least it shifts the culpability for the disparity from poor latin-americans to rich white people, which is usually less controversial.

OK. But that's unlikely to be nearly as efficient in generating good ballplayers, even if you spend the same. Without the competition/self-interest of the individual teams, and the players directly competitng for contracts, I don't see it being more than a feel-good PR stunt.

What if teams were able to use this to by pass the draft? The system would have to ensure similar compensation to the player that they would get from the draft. I would imagine some sort of cap on the number of players selected via this method, and after a certain age, they'd be eligible for the draft.

So, what are the costs to acquire a guy who's likely ceiling is AAA? Is there a real disparity in what a late round draft pick gets to sign vs a free agent deal?

I have no idea. Anecdotally, it seems that many here believe Latin free agents cost more on average, but I would guess it's actually fairly close:

Top Latin free agents == early draft picks, plus guys that fall due to signability

Org. filler Latin free agents == later draft picks

Would be interesting to see some concrete numbers, though, at least on the number of free agent signees vs. draft signees per year.

What if teams were able to use this to by pass the draft? The system would have to ensure similar compensation to the player that they would get from the draft. I would imagine some sort of cap on the number of players selected via this method, and after a certain age, they'd be eligible for the draft.

But then you run into competitive balance issues.

No one wants to see the Yankees open a $100M a year academy in LA and get all the top black athletes under contract.

I'd argue a better route to equalize opportunity is either 1) global draft 2) abolish the draft, but have a hard cap on amateur signing bonuses (maybe on a rolling 3 or 5 year basis) to accomodate a Strasburg type.

But then you run into competitive balance issues.

No one wants to see the Yankees open a $100M a year academy in LA and get all the top black athletes under contract.

Aside from the money as well, I could see it being similar to college baseball, where the top teams are all in warm climates because that's where the top players want to be. I'd hate to see a draftless MLB slowly move south (literally).

Way overrepresented compared to hockey.

The percentage of blacks among American born players is nowhere near the same as the overall percentage of blacks in the US population in the other major pro sports.

When whites are a minority and blacks are the predominant owners of pro sports, Rich's analogy might hold.

Color-blindness is an ideology that camouflages very real social inequalities. It's easy not to see these things if you aren't a minority. Witness the incomprehension of the distinction between American-born blacks and Latin Americans.

Yes, it'd be nice if race became completely irrelevant in American life. Maybe in another seven generations or so when social inequalities determined by race and ethnicity level much further.

As an admitted fan of Hunter, I think his quote was taken out of context.

He was probably making light [i.e. joking, i.e. kidding, saying it with a wry smile on his face] of the situation calling players 'imposters' and debating Vladimir Guerrero's blackness.

However, from his point of view, his opinion - he was being serious about the fact there is a dearth of opportunities for U.S. born black / Afro-American players.

A MLB team would rather fish for cheaper talent in the Dominican Republic or Venezuela, where the teams can try and develop players when they are in their teens and sign them for less bonus money than comparable high school / college players in the U.S., who see dollar signs immediately when someone says they show some promise.

You cannot deny talent, but as far signing guys who may not even reach AA and maybe organizational fillers - the MLB teams probably thinks that they'd rather sign cheaper talent, who may or may not turn out to be useful in two or three years.

Witness the incomprehension of the very real distinction between American-born blacks and Latin Americans.

From the point of view of alleged racism, there is no difference. Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?

Color-blindness is an ideology that camouflages very real social inequalities.

Color blindness is a goal we should all aspire to.

In any endeavor with concrete competitive outcomes, and huge rewards for success, I'm very confident the participants will be very color blind. Do you really think race, color, language or anything else is going to stop an MLB team from signing and fielding a good ballplayer?

Color blindness is a goal we should all aspire to.

In a different world, perhaps. In this one, I think trying to understand that race is going to mean different things to different people, and that they may say things we don't like or agree with based on their experiences, and trying to see it their way as much we can, is a better goal for us "all to aspire to."

"I think it's a pretty good hypothesis that there is something institutional keeping white Americans from developing into great basketball players. Otherwise, why are there all these white guys who can play ball in Europe, and so few from the US?"

I think it is because the white Euros play more basketball. Why that is, I don't know, but I can speculate:

1. Numbers. There are far more European whites than there are white Americans. So all else held equal you should expect more top-level talent Euro players than white American players;

2. The nexus of culture, location and hunger: the best team sport athletes (regardless of race) tend to come from lower than average income homes, because children in those circumstances have a much greater hunger to work hard and think (if they are big and athletic) that the sport is their avenue out of poverty or other troubles in their lives. But in the United States, white poverty (and most white lower-middle-classness) is not concentrated. It's diffuse. Basketball greatness tends to come out of concentrations of poverty, where the best and most ambitious players tend to play basketball against each other and the cream rises to the top. So because of their location, poorer whites have less competition. And more importantly, they likely don't have as much of a basketball-playing culture.*

By contrast, I would guess, since basketball became a very popular sport in Europe 30-40 years ago, lower-income whites are more concentrated in urban locations where, as part of the culture, they play a lot of basketball.

3. Societal position. Even though we have plenty of lower-middle income and poor whites in the U.S., they are often not at the bottom of the socio-economic pile here. They may be hungry to improve, but not quite as hungry as even poorer black-Americans living in poverty, because the whites perceive they have other opportunities beside sports.

But in Europe, esp. in poorer countries like Russia, Serbia, Croatia, Spain and Lithuania (all of which have basketball-cultures), the poorest people are almost all whites. They see themselves as the bottom of the barrel. And they think they have few opporunities outside of sports.

Anyone who ever rises to the level of the NBA is a huge anomaly, regardless of race. He normally has to be ceaselessly driven and unusually tall, extremely athletic and highly skilled. The few Euros who do make it to the NBA are likely drawn from a much larger population of highly motivated basketball-playing fellows who were less tall, less driven, less athletic or less skilled.

*In places like rural Indiana and West Virginia, which produced players like Larry Bird and Jerry West, they must have had strong basketball-playing cultures. However, in most other places with a lot of poorer whites, such as in rural California, the Dakotas, and so on, perhaps playing basketball is just not popular as a part of the culture.

Color-blindness is an ideology that camouflages very real social inequalities.

Color blindness is a goal we should all aspire to.

This is just like when the courts shift the position of the baseline for which the government protects the rights of individuals. Does the state simply protect property rights far enough to allow the market to let the chips fall where they may? In baseball, I think that would be roughly equivalent to MLB being indifferent to race in all instances. I think the existence of RBI and committees that brainstorm ideas on race disprove that notion. The furthest the baseline has gone in the other direction is to allow recognition of race and some preferential treatment (factoring it into the whole person, like in Grutter). Baseball teams don't seem to go this far- nobody is playing or signing an inferior african-american player to bump up the statistics- but the state never required quotas or preferential treatment; some organizations imposed them on themselves.

It seems like the treatment has been between the two extremes, but leaning toward the more progressive ideal. Baseball has a history of segregation, but has certainly created a "unitary" system by the 70s or so, when there was a higher % more african-american players than in the population and maybe than in other sports (?). After that, it's hard to say that the league has an obligation to force people into the league who don't want to be there.

#4: White people are the "dominant group" in the NBA?
My time machine worked!

I'm assuming Torii said something pretty close to what's printed in the USAToday. It's insensitive but it's probably true.

Per Chris Kaman analogy, I can imagine a lot of white American players saying there's a difference b/w White American and White European.

And you think guys on the DR team view Alex Rodriguez as 'Latin' as they are?

It's not a racist thing. It's a culture thing.

And I feel safe in saying that, whether he was African-American or a Black Latino, Cub fans would've hated Milton Bradley equally. I'd use Sammy Sosa as an example but he's neither of those two anymore....

Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?

Well, no, but I think a perception among some African-American ballplayers is that owners and GMs would much rather deal with a player who doesn't know much English and doesn't speak his mind as freely as some US-born players would. This is a perception; it probably distorts reality, but then all perceptions do. One shouldn't dismiss the perceptions of guys like Hunter (or, say, Gary Sheffield) out of hand. It's their life; we're not living it.

As to color-blindness, nothing's going to stop an MLB team from signing Hunter or Sheffield or any other American-born black star. But a common complaint is that it's hard to be a black journeyman player, a black middle reliever, a black AAAA guy. I don't know how that complaint matches reality, but it has deep roots, going back to early integration times. Some black players perceive that there will always be room for Mays or Griffey or whoever, but not for Joe Soap, black utility player. They may be overstating things, but people usually have some basis for such allegations, even if it's historical or anecdotal.

Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?

Racist whites will hate any non-Anglos. They won't bother distinguishing blacks from Latinos in much the same way they won't bother distinguishing Chinese from Japanese. (And speaking as a Chinese person, it's really f'n annoying when people assume I'm Japanese or Korean, so I can relate to Hunter's feelings about this.)

As is my wont in these matters, I have no problem whatsoever with what Hunter said and he has every right to be upset with the bloviations and mock outrage of the 24-hour relentlessly deconstructing news cycle. Everyone knows what he meant -- that Caribbean blacks aren't American blacks, and we shouldn't "count" them as progress toward getting more American blacks back into baseball, an aspiration I share. "Imposters" probably isn't the most literate way to have said it -- Caribbean blacks aren't passing themselves off as American blacks -- but as an oral colloquialism, it works. I can't begin to comprehend the outlook that would dub such a thing, "beyond repugnant"; that said, we all understand that the news cycle and web discussion engenders such nonsense and the author is often at their mercy.

His economic point is also accurate -- it's cheaper to procure a talented black Caribbean than a talented black American. Whether or not this impacts the ultimate numbers is a matter of opinion and he's perfectly entitled to his.

Well, no, but I think a perception among some African-American ballplayers is that owners and GMs would much rather deal with a player who doesn't know much English and doesn't speak his mind as freely as some US-born players would. This is a perception; it probably distorts reality, but then all perceptions do. One shouldn't dismiss the perceptions of guys like Hunter (or, say, Gary Sheffield) out of hand. It's their life; we're not living it.

And this.

67, 68--pretty much right on; this is a case of intersectionality all over the place, and there's the typical USian habit of when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...or racism.

Hunter had a seriously poor choice of words there. That looks more like an anti-immigrant worker argument, especially with the financial component in the statement. To look at this in a way that doesn't involve a racial argument as much, what are the usual signing bonuses for white players not subject to the draft, such as Europeans, South Africans, and Australians?

Comparing this to basketball won't work because the NBA already has an international draft. Also, the US exports basketball players to Europe and western Asia.

As was noted in the other thread on BBTF about this topic, the issue of low US Black participation in baseball is also an economic issue. Poor and/or city-based US whites and Latinos aren't getting into baseball, either. It's too expensive at the competitive youth level.

#62 - I think white Europeans are also, on average, taller than white Americans.

A-Rod was born in NY and moved to the Dominican Republic for few years when he was 4 then grew up in Miami.
So he was born in the US and lived most of his childhood in the US.
Is he black, Latino, neither...or is he just A-Fraud?


Manny was born in the DR but moved to NY when he was 13. I suppose everyone agrees he's Dominican.

These categorizations are just stupid. It makes as much sense as saying we have plenty of players from Japan and Korea but not so many Asian-Americans playing in the MLB. Are we going to set up a special program for Asian American kids?

However, from his point of view, his opinion - he was being serious about the fact there is a dearth of opportunities for U.S. born black / Afro-American players.

People who identify themselves as "Black or African-American alone" make up 12.8% of the United States population. Can someone explain how this is an injustice of opportunity that 10% of MLB is African-American?

I think white Europeans are also, on average, taller than white Americans.

Really? That kind of surprises me seeings how we are there decedents.

Although I once had a 6'5" guy tell me that there was a direct correlation with height and yearly salary. I never looked into it because I thought he was full of #### but I guess if the poor and huddled masses migrated here than by his "research" it would also be the short and stumpy masses :)

Although I once had a 6'5" guy tell me that there was a direct correlation with height and yearly salary. I never looked into it because I thought he was full of #### but I guess if the poor and huddled masses migrated here than by his "research" it would also be the short and stumpy masses :)

Richer people are more likely to have come from better backgrounds where they got better nutrition-->they grew to their maximum height.

Although I once had a 6'5" guy tell me that there was a direct correlation with height and yearly salary. I never looked into it because I thought he was full of #### but I guess if the poor and huddled masses migrated here than by his "research" it would also be the short and stumpy masses :)

I seem to remember reading this in Freakonomics...may have been a different book, but I clearly remember that.

And at 6'1", I don't feel as though I'm making enough money :P

Richer people are more likely to have come from better backgrounds where they got better nutrition-->they grew to their maximum height.

I hope you just didn't have enough time to write "it works for fat people too" because a mans got to get his hopes up.

We already had this argument a few weeks ago. Nelson Mandela is not black because he is not American. Obama is not black because his ancestor didn't come to the US on a slave ship. Tiger Woods is black although he doesn't think he is, and in reality is only 1/4 black (his father is quarter Native American and quarter white). Who makes up these rules?

No, it's not fair when non-minorities get the thumbscrews for poor choice of words. But they get it worse to 'prove' the institutions going after them are innocent of those opinions. Hunter may be wrong and insensitive, but overreacting to his comments is media-driven controversy. Where's Jeff Pearlman when you need him?

From the point of view of alleged racism, there is no difference. Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?

Context is everything. For instance, you are only seeing it from one side and as an abstraction. Dominicans aren't generally growing up with these white daughters, nor have they the cultural experience of lynching for such 'dating'.

Color blindness is a goal we should all aspire to.

Blindness means not seeing reality. Nothing good about it, no mater how liberal and tolerant it seems.

I think white Europeans are also, on average, taller than white Americans.
Really? That kind of surprises me seeings how we are there decedents.

The genetics may be similar (though certainly not identical) - the real difference is in the quality of health care, particularly to the lower classes. Over history people have gotten taller for nutritional/medical reasons. Europe has far better health care than us, and that has gotten to the point of their being taller than us, even when taking race into account. You see the same trends in other ways too - the infant mortality rate for example.

the real difference is in the quality of health care, particularly to the lower classes. Over history people have gotten taller for nutritional/medical reasons.

I am not sure I buy this as a reason. The poor are getting health care, I grew up on Medicaid and had all the coverage I wanted. When my parents were not considered poor anymore but an emerging middle class is when I went without care, and even then kids can usually get help at free clinics. My experiences with the system tell me it is usually adults that get screwed out of coverage.

Not an anti government run health care stance just not buying that as a reason we are not tall.

Europe has far better health care than us

Don't tell the Republicans that. Most European healthcare is nationalized.
And just how does better healthcare make you taller? I see a lot of tall blacks in the NBA. Did they get better healthcare?

Europe has far better health care than us,

I have a hard time seeing such peaceful, resort spots as Serbia, Croatia, and Yugoslavia as having 'far better health care'...and I'm not even going to bother looking up the infant mortality rates

So Peaches, would you condemn this statement if it had been made (as I posited above) by someone like Chris Kaman (a minority player on the Clippers)?

Depends on the totality of the circumstances.

#4: White people are the "dominant group" in the NBA?
My time machine worked!

The NBA is a country? My time machine worked!

Less facetiously, white people are dominant in our society. Joining the NBA, or living in Harlem, doesn't suddenly make one a minority in other than the literal sense of the word. 90% of the antebellum population of coastal South Carolina was black, but they weren't the dominant group.

Europe has far better health care than us, and that has gotten to the point of their being taller than us,

I also think the far better statement is a bit of an exaggeration. Our health care needs a lot of improvements compared to what we should be able to provide not in any way the difference between good and bad health care.

#62 - I think white Europeans are also, on average, taller than white Americans.

On average, Non-Hispanic White American male are 5'10 1/2", which is pretty much the same as the tallest European countries except Finland (which has produced exactly one NBA player) and possibly Denmark and Germany (the way they collected their data, using only very young military conscripts and relaying on self-reporting instead of measurement respectively, suggests exaggerated totals). White American men are, on average, 1/2 inch taller than black Americans.

But basketball ability isn't about average height so much as the instance of unusually tall individuals, and I have no idea where to get that info.

In any endeavor with concrete competitive outcomes, and huge rewards for success, I'm very confident the participants will be very color blind. Do you really think race, color, language or anything else is going to stop an MLB team from signing and fielding a good ballplayer?

Are you completely unaware of the history of MLB?

Racist whites will hate any non-Anglos.

In my experience, they are also frequently not big on Italians, Jews, or the Irish.

In my experience, they are also frequently not big on Italians, Jews, or the Irish.

None of which are Anglos (or Saxons, for that matter).

Are you completely unaware of the history of MLB?

That's works both ways. Yeah, baseball has been horribly discriminatory in the past, it's recent history should rank it as one of the least discriminatory businesses in the world (at least wrt to the players, the front offices are probably another story entirely).

Interesting...so my point in #70 is completely wrong. I thought I read a few years ago that the guys coming from Europe were above average height (even for NBA players), but maybe that's not true.

Interesting...so my point in #70 is completely wrong. I thought I read a few years ago that the guys coming from Europe were above average height (even for NBA players), but maybe that's not true.

Like I said, we're talking national averages. There may be some genetic lines from long-isolated populations in the mountainous parts of the Alps and Balkans that routinely produce freakishly tall athletes.

Edit: Okay, so it looks that actually is the case. The average height of 17 year old men in the "dinaric Alps" (basically the mountainous Balkans) is 6'1". It's on the list, but I missed it because it's not actually a country. As Dale Sams said above, though, I doubt the unusual height in that region has much to do with superior healthcare.

Perhaps, or it might just be due to the larger overall population.

A friend and I used to keep track each year of the best U.S.-born white player in the NBA. There were a few years where the answer was probably Brad Miller. I guess it's David Lee now, but haven't given it much thought.

85: I'm surprised you didn't catch the Netherlands (with both the stereotype for height + the tallest player in pro ball @ 7-1): 5'-11" (20+) / 6'-0.5" (25-34) per your link. I also think you should be careful with which #s you compare across countries (do you really want to use the 5-10.5 figure for the US for all comps?), but you likely are.

As for the health care angle, you'd want to do something longitudinal here (look at, say, 20 yr old estimates too) to weakly proxy that.

Bob Dernier Cri Posted: March 10, 2010 at 06:21 PM (#3477041)

Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?

Well, no, but I think a perception among some African-American ballplayers is that owners and GMs would much rather deal with a player who doesn't know much English and doesn't speak his mind as freely as some US-born players would.

- the old uppity n-word thingy
and uppity, mouthy n-words had better be supastahs or have stupid guaranteed contracts
- LOTS of poor dominicans
- almost NO poor american born players with Negro ancestry


This is a perception; it probably distorts reality, but then all perceptions do. One shouldn't dismiss the perceptions of guys like Hunter (or, say, Gary Sheffield) out of hand. It's their life; we're not living it.

why do you say that this perception PROBABLY distorts reality?


As to color-blindness, nothing's going to stop an MLB team from signing Hunter or Sheffield or any other American-born black star. But a common complaint is that it's hard to be a black journeyman player, a black middle reliever, a black AAAA guy. I don't know how that complaint matches reality,

- black journeyman - hmmmm, well there was tony clark. and, um, and,
- black middle reliever - can't think of even one
- black AAAA guy - hanging on at AAA, stephen randolph. on the bench as the 25th man? nope

but it has deep roots, going back to early integration times. Some black players perceive that there will always be room for Mays or Griffey or whoever, but not for Joe Soap, black utility player. They may be overstating things, but people usually have some basis for such allegations, even if it's historical or anecdotal.

- well, if it's not anecdotal, come up with some Black middle relievers or darin erstad hangers on. or tell me the name of even ONE Black ballplayers who has been described as "gritty"


Los Angeles Softballer of Anaheim Posted: March 10, 2010 at 06:29 PM (#3477044)

Do you think there are racist whites out their who hate American blacks but are just dying for a black Dominican to date their daughter?
Racist whites will hate any non-Anglos. They won't bother distinguishing blacks from Latinos in much the same way they won't bother distinguishing Chinese from Japanese. (And speaking as a Chinese person, it's really f'n annoying when people assume I'm Japanese or Korean, so I can relate to Hunter's feelings about this.)

i'm happy to hear you say that you think you are "chinese" instead of just agreeing to be called "asian" and i know exactly how you feel.

i keep telling everyone that the word "black" as used by us american born Blacks does not mean - any person on the planet who has visible Negro ancestry. it means a person who is american who has at least one american parent of Negro ancestry. it is irritating that so many people INSIST that we are not allowed to use ANY term to describe our own ethnic group

and honestly, i don't think it is that people who are NOT asian don't BOTHER distinguishing chinese from japanese or vietnamese, but that they just can't (i mean, just by looking - no last names). i TRY and unfortunately i have to admit that i get it right maybe 3 of 4 times and i don't know anyone else who is not asian who is even that accurate

However, teams have been investing a lot, for many years, in Latin American baseball academies, for the explicit purposes of getting cheap talent (and not having to compete for said talent with the NBA, NFL, etc.). I imagine Hunter and others think MLB should invest more in US programs, i.e. the inner-city RBI program.

It has nothing to do with competing with the NBA and NFL, it has to do with competing with other teams. If you scrapped the amateur draft tomorrow, every club would have a massive inner-city academy program up and running on Friday.

They go down to the Dominican and Venezuela because they get to keep what they find. They don't do it here because they have to hope no one else drafts what they find.

It is a dynamic MLS just recently has tried to wrap its thick skulls around.

#82: "Far better" health care is indeed too strong of a word. "Clearly better" is probably closer to the truth. Not a huge gap, but a demonstrable gap nonetheless. You are welcome to not know about infant mortality rates if you don't care. I don't think the discrepancy in health care is better doctors per se, but a higher likelihood of seeing a medical professional in Europe (and I should have also specified Western Europe, not sure where the line was drawn in what I have read), and also a healthier diet in general. And the nationalization of health care has made it more standardized, so the odds of getting bad health care in Europe are less than in the US. In Appalachia, infant mortality is actually rising.

And certainly I think health care is low on the list of things affecting where NBA players will come from. That's something affecting the overall average of a large group of people, whereas an NBA player is a freak in more than one way. As long as Michael Jordan plays basketball competitively, it doesn't matter where he grows up, within reason of course.

Although I once had a 6'5" guy tell me that there was a direct correlation with height and yearly salary. I never looked into it because I thought he was full of #### but I guess if the poor and huddled masses migrated here than by his "research" it would also be the short and stumpy masses :)

I seem to remember reading this in Freakonomics...may have been a different book, but I clearly remember that.

This was in Gladwell's Blink. I think a study of Fortune 500 CEOs revealed that an extraordinary percentage of them were above average in height relative to the population. The theory wasn't based on a connection between nutrition and education; it was based on our unconscious connections between physical stature and perceptions of leadership ability, etc. The story of Warren Harding's rise to the presidency was also included, though that was just an anecdote.

I'm sure my answer in #62 was incomplete. However, like a few others have said, I don't think the mean height differential (if there is one) explains any U.S.-Europe whitey difference in hoops; nor do I think nutrition or health plans are much of a factor. I think it is simply that their super-hungry tall white guys are playing a lot more basketball than ours are; and because (I am guessing) there are about twice as many poor white guys in Europe (counting Russians) as in the U.S. to choose from.

It's not Europe, but Argentina is (in that sense) overrepresented in the NBA. There were 6 Argentines on NBA rosters last year, 5 this year*. Argentina is a relatively poor country. It is a white country. And more and more it is a basketball-playing country. Just as in Europe, soccer is overwhelmingly Argentina's number one sport and the sport which draws all of its very best athletes. However, given the fact that being over, say, 6'2" is a disadvantage in soccer (save for goalies), but an advantage in basketball, athletic and tall Argentines are likely to play a lot of basketball and are more likely than white Americans (due to more Argentine poverty) of being hungry and willing to sacrfice everything for improvement in that one game.

* By contrast, there are on current rosters 2 Croatian-born players, one of whom is a Serb; 2 other Serbs; one German; no Greeks; 3 Italians; no white Brits; and 5 Spaniards.

Take this with the usual biases, obviously, but I'd love to see a video of this interview. If Hunter is right that this was a small portion of the interview, having seen Hunter interviewed countless times, this reads to me like something he said while laughing and joking. I could be wrong, but he's often not particularly serious when talking about off-field stuff,

I'm with Shredder on this. Knowing Hunter's jovial personality (at least in interviews), I can totally see him yelling "they're impostors!!!" with a big grin on his face.

And, putting aside the probability that he does have a problem with US-black representation in baseball, it's highly doubtful the "imposter" comment was anything but a poor choice of words to make the point, not that he resents black latinos, but that people wrongly think the prevalence of black latinos compensates for the under-representation of US blacks. If these were in fact his intentions, Craig's "beyond repugnant" reaction is out of line.

- well, if it's not anecdotal, come up with some Black middle relievers or darin erstad hangers on. or tell me the name of even ONE Black ballplayers who has been described as "gritty"

I always thought players like Juan Pierre, Dwight Smith, Shawon Dunston, Jerry Hairston Jr, Lenny Harris, Matt Lawton, Lloyd McClendon, Joe Thurston, Tony Womak or Jody Gerut fit the guys who are holding on or journeymen. As to the black middle relievers Ray King and Arthur Rhodes are the only middle relievers I can think of but middle relievers are usually not memberable.

As to gritty it does seem to be only used with white middle infielders by the MSM.

98 - torii means that so many non-Negro people insist that there is no problem about american born Black people not playing much baseball because they think that you can substitute any person who is not american but has Negro ancestry and then say - look, there is no racism. see all the Black people, who cares where they were born

when the point is that AMERICAN Blacks are not playing baseball, not that MLB doesn't want ANY people who have Negro ancestry